Bioarchaeological Ethics: A Historical Perspective on the Value of Human Remains

Abstract

The rapidity of technological and cultural change in current times is forcing us to confront a myriad of moral dilemmas over issues as wide ranging as the ethics of cloning humans, the ownership of our genetic material, and the rights of animals relative to those of humans. These ethical issues concern the very nature of what it means to be human and our relationships, not only to other people, but also to the plants and animals that sustain us.The enormous strides we have taken toward human equality during this century mean that formerly disenfranchised and enslaved members of minority groups are beginning to gain power and control over their lives. In many countries there has been a decline in the political dominance and moral authority of organized religions. Notions of multiculturalism and a growing acceptance of the moral principle of not discriminating against people based on gender, ethnicity, or religious beliefs mean that there is no longer a shared set of cultural values we can use for guidance in dealing with moral issues (Cottingham, 1994).This increased tolerance of cultural diversity poses ethical dilemmas because, as the

A Review of Codes of Ethics in the United States and Ethical Dilemmas Surrounding the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA)

“…The most direct example of this is forensic anthropology-the application of skeletal biological principles to legal problems. Advances in methods of skeletal age, sex and stature estimation developed on archaeological samples come largely from forensic research on large documented skeletal samples, or reference samples, designed to increase the accuracy of personal identifications of skeletal remains [4,5]. Further, methods once thought to be useful have been proven erroneous by validation studies using reference samples [6].…”

“…Further, methods once thought to be useful have been proven erroneous by validation studies using reference samples [6]. This self-correcting aspect of the scientific method is what justifies long-term/permanent procurement of human skeletal collections [5,7]. By restudying the skeletal collections, future generations of scientists could make new discoveries with more advanced technologies and methods than their predecessors [5,8].…”

“…This self-correcting aspect of the scientific method is what justifies long-term/permanent procurement of human skeletal collections [5,7]. By restudying the skeletal collections, future generations of scientists could make new discoveries with more advanced technologies and methods than their predecessors [5,8]. Under appropriate curation, human skeletal collections are a never-ending source of scientific exploration.…”

“…The problems are fundamentally derived from vague definitions in the law that could be interpreted in multiple ways [50]. It is unanimous among biological anthropologists, archaeologists, Native Americans and general public that the lineal descendants or close family/relatives are prioritized for the disposition of the human remains [3,5,20,52]. However, the burden is on the tribe(s) to prove, with a preponderance of evidence, that they are culturally affiliated with the skeletal remains.…”

“…Nevertheless, to most Native Americans, oral traditions, legends and myths, rather than scientific input, have been known to be what really construct their worldview. As Walker [5] states: "Some indigenous people reject the epistemology of science, at least as it applies to their history and cultural affairs, and instead they prefer to view the past as it is revealed through traditional ways of knowing such as oral history, legend, myths, and appeal to the authority of revered leaders. For people with this perspective, scientific research directed toward documenting the past is... potentially culturally subversive..."…”